S 5499: STOP TICKS Act

S 5499 in plain English: The STOP TICKS Act would increase federal funding for tick-borne disease programs under the Public Health Service Act. It raises two separate funding levels for fiscal years 2026 through 2030: one program would receive $12,000,000 per year and another would receive $21,000,000 per year.

Stated purpose

The bill aims to renew and strengthen federal programs focused on tick-borne diseases by reauthorizing the Tick-Borne Disease Working Group, expanding its membership across more federal agencies, and continuing funding for regional disease research centers and state health department support programs.

Key points

• Increases one tick-borne disease program's funding to $12,000,000 per year for fiscal years 2026 through 2030
• Increases a second tick-borne disease support program's funding to $21,000,000 per year for fiscal years 2026 through 2030
• Amends two sections of the Public Health Service Act to extend and raise these funding levels

Arguments supporters make

• Tick-borne diseases affect hundreds of thousands of Americans each year, and reauthorizing these programs keeps proven research and prevention work going without interruption.
• Expanding the Working Group to include more agencies like the EPA, Forest Service, and Defense Health Agency creates a more complete, government-wide approach to a problem that spans environments and populations.
• The funding increases are modest and targeted, helping regional centers and health departments keep pace with rising costs while continuing important surveillance work.

Arguments opponents make

• The bill largely extends existing programs with only minor changes, which critics may see as maintaining the status quo rather than addressing deeper gaps in tick-borne disease diagnosis, treatment, and research.
• Adding more federal agencies to a working group can make coordination slower and more bureaucratic without necessarily improving outcomes for patients.
• With pressure to reduce federal spending, critics may question whether renewing and slightly increasing funding for these specific programs is the best use of limited public health dollars.

Tradeoffs

Continuing and modestly expanding these programs means more federal coordination and resources for tick-borne disease prevention, but requires ongoing public spending and adds more agencies to a working group that must reach consensus across a larger and more complex membership.

Current status in Congress: In committee.

NewsClear — neutral news & congressional tracking · Bill of the Week